ADVERTISEMENT

⚖️ MURDAUGH MURDERS & TRIAL THREAD ⚖️

I think he really thought he would easily get away with it, but Karma did him in. Where would this case be without the two videos, the extensive phone data, and the extensive car data?

What the prosecution has wasn't even possible 15 years ago.

Seems like there were two main triggers:

1. The lawsuit discovery on his finances that was just days away
2. Being asked that day by his firm about the missing $800K

What I don't have a clear understanding of is why he killed Maggie. Had he told her something that would add fuel to the embezzlement fire? Did he suspect that she was going to divorce him already, or because of the embezzlement? Was he such a narcissist that he couldn't stand how she would react to the embezzlement? Did he believe that she would pin Paul's murder on him for some reason if he killed Paul?

Idk...

I want to know the part about Maggie. The logic doesn’t make since with what we know today.

Could it be that AM knew that killing Paul would push her over the edge and she would divorce him. So two birds, one stone sort of thing. Maybe we eventually find out.
 
It's a marathon, not a sprint, and you have to share the labor.

You can't have your top running back in on every play, just like Waters can't handle every single witness -- especially if the witness is a highly technical one, as those can take a long time to prep an effective cross-examination for.
No doubt, but when you’re in the National Championship game, you sub out as needed and otherwise suck it up. Be more like Deshaun beating Scar with a torn ACL than Kearse.

Different experience for different technical witnesses, sure. But Buster? Cmon. The second he sat thru this entire trial as a spectator and then took the stand in that manner…fair fvckin game. Not really drilling Sutton even harder, as has been outlined in this thread. Easy.
 
Have a ? for attorneys on here.

Sawtwo separate gun experts on shows last night who were asked to comment on the expert yesterday sayin the shooter likely was 5'2". they said you cannot determine the height of a shooter . Gun can be held on many ways, etc. Also refuted some of the sound stuff and other things. They basically laughed at what the guy said but did say his delivery was smooth

My question is ...can the prosecution bring an expert in after the defense closes to call the bullshit for what it is ? At this point that is all the defense has other than no man would butcher his family like that and claiming the prosecution's stated motive is BS

Yes, The State can call additional witnesses to combat expert testimony provided by the defense and they are likely working on that as we speak.
 
Is this video online to watch or did y’all just see it while watching the trial?
It’s on Google, I heard it while listening to the trial. The silence was deafening when he was asked about video. His first question is what time was that. LE “looks like dusk” he says I guess when we ate dinner
 
Question for the lawyers….is is difficult to cross examine the person you are accusing of murder?
 

a7ff16f4-18de-4f84-b0e7-cb845b3f2616_text.gif
 
  • Haha
Reactions: my95GTHO
Most don’t get the chance. I can’t see how in the world they put that cat on the stand.
Pure speculation on my part but if that happens, I have to believe it is clear window into their thinking ... as in an indicator that they feel they probably have to have it, an indicator that they don't feel this is heading toward the outcome they're seeking as things stand today.
 
Pure speculation on my part but if that happens, I have to believe it is clear window into their thinking ... as in an indicator that they feel they probably have to have it, an indicator that they don't feel this is heading toward the outcome they're seeking as things stand today.

100% agree, has to be seen as a Hail Mary.
 
Pure speculation on my part but if that happens, I have to believe it is clear window into their thinking ... as in an indicator that they feel they probably have to have it, an indicator that they don't feel this is heading toward the outcome they're seeking as things stand today.
Agreed. I don’t believe they need it either. The cell phone expert for the defense today blew up the whole “Alex threw the phone out the window” theory and the csi expert showed that law enforcement failed in their job of evidence collecting.
 
I just watched the interrogation of Mr Ball. How could the defense be so stupid to let him be on the stand. Waters nailed that cross and made AM look terrible.
I am speculating here... I think Jim was friends with Paul and Maggie as well as Buster.... but it almost seems like there is a softening in his demeanor... in that he knows his client has lied and lied and lied to him and he feels betrayed, fed up with even. He appears to be a shrewd dude. If AM testifies it may be sign that Jim is ready for this charade to end.
 
How can you tell if a person is narcissistic?


Symptoms
  • Have an unreasonably high sense of self-importance and require constant, excessive admiration.
  • Feel that they deserve privileges and special treatment.
  • Expect to be recognized as superior even without achievements.
  • Make achievements and talents seem bigger than they are.
 
No doubt, but when you’re in the National Championship game, you sub out as needed and otherwise suck it up. Be more like Deshaun beating Scar with a torn ACL than Kearse.

Different experience for different technical witnesses, sure. But Buster? Cmon. The second he sat thru this entire trial as a spectator and then took the stand in that manner…fair fvckin game. Not really drilling Sutton even harder, as has been outlined in this thread. Easy.


I definitely would have been a little tougher than they were on Buster. Not too snarky, but tougher. For example, Buster says he packed Alex's bag for him at Moselle after the murders before they left for Almeada. Buster said this to try to explain why the housekeeper found one of Alex's shirts on the floor (Alex dropped it there accidentally while changing).

I cannot imagine a scenario where Buster packed his dad's bag that night. I would've asked if he'd done anything like that before, if he knew ahead of time where his dad kept different clothing items, whether he packed his underwear, what style of underwear Alex wears, whether he packed a toothbrush for him, whether Alex asked Buster to pack the bag. Now if John Marvin's wife got on the stand and said she packed it, then sure, I can buy that. Buster did not pack it, and the state could have pretty easily exposed the lie IMO.
 
Just caught up on todays witnesses. Why in the fvck would the defense call Ball and Cook?! Also, why would the state let Meadors cross the foot guy? He totally fvcked that up
 
  • Like
Reactions: BarnwellTiger
Agreed. I don’t believe they need it either. The cell phone expert for the defense today blew up the whole “Alex threw the phone out the window” theory and the csi expert showed that law enforcement failed in their job of evidence collecting.
I disagree the phone expert blew anything up. An iPhone doesn’t light up simply when moved. It has to be in the direction of a face. If the phone was locked and AM threw it out the truck window, that phone would have never lit up which it didn’t
 
Pure speculation on my part but if that happens, I have to believe it is clear window into their thinking ... as in an indicator that they feel they probably have to have it, an indicator that they don't feel this is heading toward the outcome they're seeking as things stand today.
Simple closing for the state. The facts prove beyond a reasonable doubt that there were 3 people in the kennels the night of June 7 and 2 of them are dead. The facts prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the numerous motives for the murders by the defendant that were malicious. The facts prove beyond a reasonable doubt the victims were lured to the location by the defendant and that the outcome was premeditated. Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, your duty is clear. Remember ladies and gentlemen…there were 3 people present and 2 of them are now dead.
 
I disagree the phone expert blew anything up. An iPhone doesn’t light up simply when moved. It has to be in the direction of a face. If the phone was locked and AM threw it out the truck window, that phone would have never lit up which it didn’t
I just lifted my phone 10 times away from any face. I’m in a dark room. All 10 times the phone lit up when I lifted it an inch or two.

Seems like maybe the expert knew what he was talking about.
 
I just watched the interrogation of Mr Ball. How could the defense be so stupid to let him be on the stand. Waters nailed that cross and made AM look terrible. Ball better watch his back and both sides going forward.
I thought the same thing. When I read what he testified about (I can' watch it live so I basically read the transcript of the testimony) I could have sworn he was called for the prosecution. He proved the prosecutions case even more.
 

Anybody need a new avatar? The look of joy and confusion on Poots face is great.
Hmmmmm....Defense alleges the shooter is 5'2"; Poot says AM isn't the shooter; Poot knows how to hold that weapon and aim at a human....so maybe the shooter is in fact in the courtroom, is an attorney, is sitting at the Defense table, and goes home each night not to jail but his wife......hmmmmm🥸
 
  • Like
Reactions: sloanMB
Pure speculation on my part but if that happens, I have to believe it is clear window into their thinking ... as in an indicator that they feel they probably have to have it, an indicator that they don't feel this is heading toward the outcome they're seeking as things stand today.
My thinking as well. Its a hail mary from midfield
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT